punked Posted August 29, 2012 Report Share Posted August 29, 2012 But as I said, good governance comes with a cost. The reality is, Canada has very effective governance as is. That's why I'm not in a hurry for any change...especially abolition. Yep I agree but the Senate isn't doing anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 29, 2012 Report Share Posted August 29, 2012 Yep I agree but the Senate isn't doing anything. Except what it's supposed to do. Watch some Senate committees sometimes. It's not the useless body the NDP has led you to believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted August 29, 2012 Report Share Posted August 29, 2012 (edited) Except what it's supposed to do. Watch some Senate committees sometimes. It's not the useless body the NDP has led you to believe. I have watched Senate Committees... I won't miss them. No different from other committees, hashing and rehasing the same thing. Government bills are often the bills reintroduced over and over again each time Parliment is prorogued... I believe when the Senate killed a bill passed by the house last year, it lost its legitimacy. Edited August 29, 2012 by madmax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 29, 2012 Report Share Posted August 29, 2012 I believe when the Senate killed a bill passed by the house last year, it lost its legitimacy. Oh, I don't know, I think it proved that it still has a purpose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted August 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Now it seems reporter roy macgregor I think, said in todays paper that he asked the libs about the rumour a year ago and they said nothing is wrong with her. They totally abuse this poor women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tilter Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 But by all accounts she was a very hard working person for the senate.The senate still has a place ,it just needs some tweaking, well alot of tweaking. lol Was being the proper wording. As in "isn't any more" Dump her in case something extraordinary happens and the senate gets something that can be decided in their jurisdiction (what the hell that could be isn't known ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 (what the hell that could be isn't known ) Are you laughing at your own stupidity? Every bill that goes through parliament is within "the jurisdiction" of the Senate. This is basic civics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 Not necessarily. The Senate often tweaks legislation for various reasons, including regional concerns. Such as? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 Such as? Well, for that, you'd actually have to watch the work of the committees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 Except what it's supposed to do. Watch some Senate committees sometimes. It's not the useless body the NDP has led you to believe. I don't really think the Senate Committees justify the cost of the Senate. It's practically a rubber stamp and we have the Supreme Court to hear challenges to any legislation that violates the Charter. It is pretty pointless; especially when you have Senators like Mike Duffy, Brazeau, and the woman with dementia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 The way our Senate is set up has it using actual power very little, and existing as a place to ensure that due diligence was done. I think I actually prefer that to say, the US Senate. Besides that, there is no federation on the planet without some kind of upper house. There has to be reason for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 The way our Senate is set up has it using actual power very little, and existing as a place to ensure that due diligence was done. I think I actually prefer that to say, the US Senate. Besides that, there is no federation on the planet without some kind of upper house. There has to be reason for that. Quite right, Smallc, there is no federation without some kind of Upper House. However, there is no other federation with an Upper House like Canada's! No doubt there is a reason for that as well. I agree that there is a necessary and useful role for our Senate. I just think it has never been structured that way. I favour the Reform idea of a Triple E Senate. I happen to believe that smaller provinces need an offset power based on region against the population-based power of the Commons. I just don't see how our Senate has ever properly performed such functions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 However, there is no other federation with an Upper House like Canada's! There are many many unique iterations on the upper house. I agree that there is a necessary and useful role for our Senate. I just think it has never been structured that way. I favour the Reform idea of a Triple E Senate. I happen to believe that smaller provinces need an offset power based on region against the population-based power of the Commons. I don't prefer Triple E. Then we'll end up with the deadlock that you see in the US. I don't think that's a solution at all. I don't favour popular election for senators. Balance the province, give the power of appointment to the provinces, fine, but don't bring in another group of elected people to clash with the other group of elected people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 The way our Senate is set up has it using actual power very little, and existing as a place to ensure that due diligence was done. I think I actually prefer that to say, the US Senate. Besides that, there is no federation on the planet without some kind of upper house. There has to be reason for that. Unlike most in the NDP, I see a purpose for the Senate. However, I don't see it operating in that fashion currently. I don't necessarily think that the Senate should be abolished, but should serve to function as an equalizer between the regions. That's how it was setup when you look at the seat counts. You have primarily 4 regions (West, Ontario, Québec, Maritimes) plus Newfoundland and the territories. I believe Senators should have longer terms than Parliament and they should be elected to represent their regions' interests within confederation. I also believe that the Assembly of First Nations should have a Senate seat that they can elect themselves, but that would disqualify them from voting in the regional Senate election. Having said all of that, I don't believe the Senate currently holds the regions' interests and functions in the way that it should in a confederation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 Like I said, I'm very dubious on an elected Senate, given what often happens in the US and Australia with regards to deadlock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 Like I said, I'm very dubious on an elected Senate, given what often happens in the US and Australia with regards to deadlock. Deadlock may be sometimes necessary to ensure that one region isn't getting screwed over another. It could be an unelected Senate with people appointed by the regions that would work for me too. In fact that may be better. One issue I have with what I described above is that Senators from a particular party in one region teaming up with Senators from the same party in another region, all looking out for their "teams" rather than their regions. The last thing we need is a Senate that simply mirrors the team mentality of the Commons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 Deadlock may be sometimes necessary to ensure that one region isn't getting screwed over another. It could be an unelected Senate with people appointed by the regions that would work for me too. In fact that may be better. One issue I have with what I described above is that Senators from a particular party in one region teaming up with Senators from the same party in another region, all looking out for their "teams" rather than their regions. The last thing we need is a Senate that simply mirrors the team mentality of the Commons. Or to make sure you can hold the West hostage in pushing forward things they need to grow so the East can get some sweet sweet pork? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 I don't understand your point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 I don't understand your point. It is that in the States Senators hold Legislation that is good for the country back until someone attaches something they want or need for their state is attached to it. This leads to a huge amount of pork which I think would be bad for Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 It is that in the States Senators hold Legislation that is good for the country back until someone attaches something they want or need for their state is attached to it. This leads to a huge amount of pork which I think would be bad for Canada. There's only 4 regions in the Canadian Senate. I don't think it would be even remotely close to the same thing as it is in the states. And maybe, just maybe it would benefit the ailing Maritimes. Perhaps they should be asking confederation "What's in it for us?" more frequently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 There's only 4 regions in the Canadian Senate. I don't think it would be even remotely close to the same thing as it is in the states. And maybe, just maybe it would benefit the ailing Maritimes. Perhaps they should be asking confederation "What's in it for us?" more frequently. That is not how the Senate works. The Senate is given seats by provinces. Senators come from provinces not regions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 3, 2012 Report Share Posted September 3, 2012 That is not how the Senate works. The Senate is given seats by provinces. Senators come from provinces not regions. Yes, but their numbers intentionally equalizes the regions. There's 24 for the West, 24 for Ontario, 24 for Québec, and 24 for the Maritimes plus 6 for Newfoundland and 1 for each territory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete t teepee Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 Well Pik, my first question is, how did anyone know the poor dear had dementia? Senators always vote along party lines, just like MPs. Especially Liberals, who held a visceral hatred of Reform and its firm commitment to having an MP vote his or her constituents' wishes first and those of the party second. If she had been of sound mind I have no doubt she still would have voted like a trained seal. So how have we been injured with a result out of the ordinary? Agreed. Cons seem desperate with this one. The liberal horsey is dead, stop beating it. It's startin to make squishy noises already lol. Next we're gonna hear..LIBERAL SPONSORSHIP SCANDAL OOOOO...AAAHHHHHH. How come the story of the Con minister handing out a huge construction project to his own constituency with G20 funds, faded away so quietly. His constituency was 100 miles from the G20 and they caught him meddling in the decision making. That one indiscretion far exceeded the entire sponsorship scandal but the story just fades away quietly...hmmmm...me tinking media smack of conservatism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tilter Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 Are you laughing at your own stupidity? Every bill that goes through parliament is within "the jurisdiction" of the Senate. This is basic civics. Ant Fill in the blank _____________ bills been have killed by the senate in the last 25 years. ZERO-- bills been have killed by the senate in the last 25 years. There, I did it for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.